Responsiveness and Minimally Important Changes for Persian-version of Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation Questionnaire in Patients with Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy Following Physiotherapy Intervention

Document Type : RESEARCH PAPER


1 Department of Physical Therapy, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

2 1 Department of Physical Therapy, School of Paramedical Sciences, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran 2 Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

3 2 Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran 3 Rothman Orthopaedics Florida at AdventHealth, Orlando, USA

4 Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran


Background: Evaluating responsiveness and calculating minimally important change (MIC) for the Persian-version
of the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) questionnaire following physiotherapy in patients with lateral
elbow tendinopathy (LET).
Methods: We enrolled 82 patients with LET to complete the PRTEE. After completing four weeks of physiotherapy,
all patients were reevaluated by the PRTEE. The patients also rated their changes on a 7-point global rating of change
scale (GRoC). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and correlation analysis were used for evaluating the
responsiveness. The MIC was determined by determining a desirable cutoff on the ROC curve.
Results:The results showed a moderate relationship (Spearman’s correlation coefficient= 0.43-0.56) of total PRTEE,
pain subscale, and function subscale with the GRoC scale. The total PRTEE, pain subscale, and function subscale
revealed an area under the curve of 0.87, 0.82, and 0.83, respectively. We found the MICs 31.33, 14.5, and 15.5 points
for total PRTEE, pain subscale, and function subscale, respectively.
Conclusion: The Persian-version of the PRTEE questionnaire has acceptable responsiveness and can measure
changes in patients with LET following physiotherapy. We advocate using the PRTEE questionnaire in both clinical
settings and research.
Level of evidence: IV


1. Peterson M, Butler S, Eriksson M, Svärdsudd K. A
randomized controlled trial of eccentric vs. concentric
graded exercise in chronic tennis elbow (lateral elbow
tendinopathy). Clin Rehabil. 2014; 28(9):862-72. doi:
2. Manias P, Stasinopoulos DJBjosm. A controlled
clinical pilot trial to study the effectiveness of ice
as a supplement to the exercise programme for
the management of lateral elbow tendinopathy.
Br J Sports Med. 2006; 40(1):81-5. doi: 10.1136/
3. Smidt N, Windt DAvander, Assendelft WJ, Devillé
WL, Korthals-de Bos IB, Bouter LM. Corticosteroid
injections, physiotherapy, or a wait-and-see policy
for lateral epicondylitis: a randomised controlled
trial. Lancet. 2002; 359. doi: 10.1016/S0140-
4. Bisset L, Paungmali A, Vicenzino B, Beller E. A
systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials
on physical interventions for lateral epicondylalgia.
Br J Sports Med. 2005; 39 (7):411-22. doi: 10.1136/
5. Lee S, Ko Y, Lee W. Changes in Pain, Dysfunction,
and Grip Strength of Patients with Acute Lateral
Epicondylitis Caused by Frequency of Physical
Therapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Phys Ther
Sci. 2014; 26 (7):1037-40. doi: 10.1589/jpts.26.1037.
6. Ebrahimzadeh M, Moradi A, Vahedi E, Kachooei A,
Birjandinejad A. Validity and reliability of the Persian
version of shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder
and hand questionnaire (quick-DASH). Int J Prev Med.
2015; 6 (1):59. doi: 10.4103/2008-7802.160336.
7. Vincent J, MacDermid JC. Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow
Evaluation Questionnaire. J Physiother. 60 (4):240.
doi: 10.1016/j.jphys.2014.08.002.
8. MacDermid JC. The Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow
Evaluation (PRTEE) User Manual. Hamilton, Canada:
School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University.
9. Rompe JD, Overend TJ, MacDermid JC. Validation of the
Patient-rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation Questionnaire.
J Hand Ther. 2007; 20 (1):3-11. doi: 10.1197/j.
10. Cacchio A, Necozione S, MacDermid JC, et al. Cross-
Cultural Adaptation and Measurement Properties of
the Italian Version of the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow
Evaluation (PRTEE) Questionnaire. Phys Ther. 2012;
92 (8):1036-45. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20110398.
11. Hanyu T, Watanabe M, Masatomi T, Nishida K,
Nakagawa T, Nishiura Y, et al. Reliability, validity,
and responsiveness of the Japanese version of the
patient-rated elbow evaluation. J Orthop Sci. 2013; 18
(5):712-9. doi: 10.1007/s00776-013-0408-z.
12. Chung B, Wiley JP. Validity, responsiveness and
reliability of the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow
Evaluation. J Hand Ther. 2010; 15 (3):62-8. https://
13. Farazdaghi MR, Mansoori A, Vosoughi O, Yoosefinejad
AK. Evaluation of the reliability and validity of the
Persian version of Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation
questionnaire. Rheumatol. 2017; 37 (5):743-50. doi:
14. Mansoori A, Noorizadeh Dehkordi S, Mansour Sohani
S, Nodehi Moghadam A. Cross-Cultural Adaptation
and Determination of the Validity and Reliability
of the Persian Version of the Patient-Rated Tennis
Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) Questionnaire in Iranian
Tennis Players. Func Disabil J. 2019; 2 (1):17-26.doi:
15. Shafiee E, Farzad M, Macdermid JC, Beygi AS,
Vafaei A, Farhoud A. Cross-cultural adaptation
and measurement properties of the Patient-Rated
Tennis Elbow Evaluation for the Persian language.
J Hand Ther. 2020; 25 (2): 56-62. https://doi.
16. Guyatt G, Walter S, Norman GJJocd. Measuring change
over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative
instruments. J Chronic Dis. 1987; 40 (2):171-8. doi:
17. Pengel LHM, Refshauge KM, Maher CG. Responsiveness
of Pain, Disability, and Physical Impairment Outcomes
in Patients with Low Back Pain. Spine. 2004; 29
(8):879-83. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200404150-
18. Negahban H, Mostafaee N, Sohani SM, Hessam M,
Tabesh H, Montazeri A. Responsiveness and minimally
important differences for selected Persian-version of
outcome measures used in patients with patellofemoral
pain syndrome. Disabil Rehabil. 2015; 37 (14):1285-
90. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2014.962107.
19. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods
for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and
recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000; 53 (5):459-
68. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00206-1.
20. Hoogvliet P, Randsdorp MS, Dingemanse R, Koes BW,
Huisstede BMA. Does effectiveness of exercise therapy
and mobilisation techniques offer guidance for the
treatment of lateral and medial epicondylitis? A
systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2013;47(17):1112-
9. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091990.
21. Mostafaee N, Divandari A, Negahban H, et al. Shoulder
and scapula muscle training plus conventional
physiotherapy versus conventional physiotherapy
only: a randomized controlled trial of patients with
lateral elbow tendinopathy. Physiother Theory Pract.
22. Mostafaee N, Negahban H, Shaterzadeh Yazdi MJ,
Goharpey S, Mehravar M, Pirayeh N. Responsiveness
of a Persian version of Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis
Outcome Score and Tegner activity scale in athletes
with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
following physiotherapy treatment. Physiother
Theory Pract. 2020; 36 (9):1019-26. doi:
23. Trudel D, Duley J, Zastrow I, Kerr EW, Davidson R, Macdermid JC. Rehabilitation for patients with lateral
epicondylitis: a systematic review. J Hand Ther.
2004;17(2):243-66. doi: 10.1197/j.jht.2004.02.011.
24. Ellenbecker TS, Nirschl R, Renstrom P. Current
concepts in examination and treatment of elbow
tendon injury. Sports Health. 2013; 5 (2):186-94. doi:
25. S Soer R, Reneman MF, Vroomen PCAJ, Stegeman P,
Coppes MH. Responsiveness and Minimal Clinically
Important Change of the Pain Disability Index in
Patients with Chronic Back Pain. Spine. 2012; 37
(8):711-5. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31822c8a7a.
26. Tamura Y, Seki K, Usami M, et al. Cultural
adaptation and validating a Japanese version of
the readiness for interprofessional learning scale
(RIPLS). J Interprof Care. 2012; 26 (1):56-63. doi:
27. Salehi R, Negahban H, Saghayezhian N, Saadat
M. The Responsiveness of the Persian Version of
Neck Disability Index and Functional Rating Index
Following Physiotherapy Intervention in People with
Chronic Neck Pain. Iran J Med Sci. 2019; 44 (5):390-6.
doi: 10.30476/ijms.2019.44963.
28. Hajian-Tilaki KJCjoim. Receiver operating
characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for medical
diagnostic test evaluation. Caspian J Intern Med.
2013; 4 (2):627.
29. Youden WJJC. Index for rating diagnostic tests. 1950; 3
(1):32-5. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1<32::aidcncr2820030106>;2-3.
30. Poltawski L, Watson TJHT. Measuring clinically
important change with the Patient-rated Tennis
Elbow Evaluation. J Hand Ther. 2011; 16 (3):52-7.
31. Shafiee E, MacDermid JC, Walton D, Vincent JI,
Grewal R. Psychometric properties and crosscultural
adaptation of the Patient-Rated Tennis
Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE); a systematic review and
meta-analysis. Disabil Rehabil. 2021; 1:1-16. doi:
32. Farzad M, MacDermid JC, Shafiee E, Beygi AS, Vafaei
A, Varahra A, et al. Clinimetric testing of the Persian
version of the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation
(PRTEE) and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder,
and Hand (DASH) questionnaires in patients
with lateral elbow tendinopathy. Disabil Rehabil.
33. van Kampen DA, Willems WJ, van Beers LWAH,
Castelein RM, Scholtes VAB, Terwee CB. Determination
and comparison of the smallest detectable change
(SDC) and the minimal important change (MIC) of
four-shoulder patient-reported outcome measures
(PROMs). J Orthop Surg Res. 2013; 8 (1):40. doi:
34. Kamper SJ, Maher CG, Mackay G. Global rating of
change scales: a review of strengths and weaknesses
and considerations for design. J Man Manip Ther. 2009;
17 (3):163-70. doi: 10.1179/jmt.2009.17.3.163.
35. Lehman LA, Velozo CA. Ability to detect change in
patient function: responsiveness designs and methods
of calculation. J Hand Ther. 2010; 23 (4):361-71. doi:
36. Norman GR, Stratford P, Regehr G. Methodological
problems in the retrospective computation of
responsiveness to change: the lesson of Cronbach. J
Clin Epidemiol. 1997; 50 (8):869-79. doi: 10.1016/
Volume 10, Issue 10
October 2022
Pages 885-891
  • Receive Date: 26 April 2022
  • Revise Date: 12 July 2022
  • Accept Date: 19 July 2022
  • First Publish Date: 18 September 2022